Reading ComprehensionDifficulty: Easy

PT149 S2 P2 Q9 Explanation

The Multiverse

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Reading Comprehension question.

TopicsAuthor OpinionScience

Keep going in LSAT Lab

  • Save & drill this skill build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Full official LSAT questions are available through LawHub. This page provides LSAT Lab's explanation, strategy, and review tools without republishing the full official question.

Passage

In a typical Hollywood action movie, the hero skirts death to complete a mission. Bad guys shoot, cars explode, objects fall from the sky, but all just miss. If any one of those things happened would be dead. Yet the hero survives.

In some respects, the story of our universe resembles an action movie. A slight change to any one of the laws of physics would likely have caused some disaster that would have disrupted the normal evolution of the universe and made life impossible. For example, if the strong nuclear force had been physics must be so finely tuned that the very existence of such a universe becomes improbable.

Some cosmologists have tried to reconcile the existence of our universe with the seeming improbability of its existence by hypothesizing that our universe is but one of many universes within a wider array called the multiverse. In almost all of those universes, the laws of physics might not allow the formation of a good chance to get the “right” set of laws at least once.

But just how exceptional is the set of physical laws governing our universe? The view that the laws of physics are finely tuned arises largely from the difficulty scientists have had that would be compatible with life.

The conventional way scientists explore whether a particular constant of physics is finely tuned is to tweak it while leaving all other constants unaltered. The scientists then “play the movie” of that universe—they do calculations, what-if scenarios, or computer simulations—to see what disasters occur. But there is no reason to tweak just compatible with the formation of complex structures and perhaps even some forms of intelligent life.

Fine tuning has been invoked by some cosmologists as indirect evidence for the multiverse. Do our findings therefore call the concept of the multiverse into question? I do not think this is necessarily the case for two reasons. First, certain models of the birth of the universe would lead us to expect be the source of solutions to certain other long-standing puzzles in cosmology.

What this question is testing

Author Opinion

Your task

Pin down exactly what the question asks about the passage — a detail, the author's view, the structure, or the main point — before looking at the choices.

Common trap

Answers that restate a true detail from the passage but don't answer the specific question being asked.

Winning move

Anticipate the answer in your own words from the passage, then find the choice that matches that prediction.

Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.

The question
9.

The author would be most likely to agree with which one of the following statements about the conventional way in which scientists investigate the apparent

Answer choices

  1. Wrong Objection2% picked this

    It focuses on looking for outcomes that are irrelevant to the

    The author's objection is just "why are you only changing one variable at a time?" According to this, the author's objection is, "Why are you analyzing these outcomes of your unfurling alternate universe? They're irrelevant to the issue at hand!"

  2. Opposite, if anything1% picked this

    It is too unfocused to produce

    Since the author's objection is, "Why are you lame-o's only changing one variable at a time. This is why you aren't able to come up with viable alternate universes", if anything she would say that they are too focused (on one variable at a time) to get useful results.

  3. Opposite, if anything1% picked this

    It has been conducted without concern for

    The conventional way is changing one variable at a time, leaving everything else unchanged. That's actually a rigorous process. That allows them to know exactly what caused any observed difference they see in the alternate universe. A lack of rigor would be changing a few variables at once randomly, and then seeing differences but not knowing exactly how to attribute them to each altered variables.

  4. Correct84% picked this

    Its methodology results in an overly restricted set

    Why this is right

    The author's objection is, "Why are you guys only changing one variable at a time. This is why you aren't able to come up with viable alternate universes". It's methodology of only changing one variable at a time results in an overly restricted set of alternate universes (ones that can't support life). This created the false impression that our universe is incredibly rare and fine tuned. Our author is saying there are plenty of viable outcomes, if you just change a few variables at the same time. We anticipated the idea of "you're constraining yourself too much", and that matches well with "overly restricted".

    Skill tested: Author Opinion · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.

  5. Opposite12% picked this

    It will eventually produce a workable model of an alternate universe

    This answer sounds like the author is encouraged and optimistic about the conventional way, but our author thinks the conventional way was bad. She thinks that because they were (foolishly) only allowing themselves to change one variable at a time, they were finding it (unnecessarily) difficult to identify an alternative set of laws that could be compatible with life.

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free